According to current prices and tariffs, an inbound U.S. telephone call from another country is more expensive than an outbound U.S. call to that country. This means that a call originated in the U.S. for termination in a foreign country is typically cheaper than the reversed call, i.e., the same call originated in the foreign country for termination in the U.S. This is particularly true in the emerging free market economies which have less advanced and fewer telecommunications networks than the U.S. Absence of competitive market forces, as well as considerable investment of capital required for entering the telecommunications market, contribute to the existing high cost of telecommunications equipment and services in those countries.
The significant difference in telephone rates between the U.S. inbound and outbound telephone calls has spawned a new industry of so-called reverse call origination. The traditional, i.e. forward, origination of a telephone call is from a calling party to a called party. The calling party pays for the call charges with the exception of a collect call, 1-800 call, bill-to-third-party call, certain cellular services, special N00 services where N (2-9) is the first digit for an area code (Numbering Plan Area) of a telephone number, etc. In contrast to the forward call origination, the reverse telephone call originates from the called party equipment at the request of the calling party. The signaling information associated with the call proceeds in the reverse direction: from a switching office (switch), connected to the called party station via a Private Branch Exchange (PBX), to a switch serving the calling party via another PBX, for example. As known in the art, a signaling network, being a part of a telecommunications network, provides for an exchange of information related to a telephone call for voice/data/video. Typically, such signaling messages carry information regarding call set-up or tear-down, card validation, number translation, and other data transactions associated with the telephone call. Utilizing the reverse call origination, the calling party pays the call charges even though the call has been originated by the telecommunications equipment serving the called party station.
As stated above, a significant cost advantage exists in originating an international telephone call from the U.S. To capitalize on cheaper U.S. calling rates and non-trivial price difference, several companies have set up operations in the U.S. for providing reverse call origination services to people abroad who place calls to the U.S. In some cases, the telephone service using the reverse call origination can be used advantageously even for calls that do not terminate in the U.S. These are transitory calls—from one foreign country to another foreign country via the U.S.—that establish the U.S. as a point of origin for obtaining cheaper rates.
Typically, the providers of the reverse call origination service purchase volume discounted telephone service from major U.S. long distance carriers and then resell it to callers in other countries at a higher premium. By providing the reverse call origination to the callers abroad, the resellers may place inbound international calls at slightly higher U.S. rates than the major U.S. long distance carriers. Nevertheless, the cost of the call is still lower than the cost of an inbound international call originated outside the U.S.
One of the most widely used methods of the reverse call origination, also known as a call-back service, is based on automatic number identification (ANI) detecting means. For example, if an overseas caller Pierre wishes to call Jimmy, a business acquaintance in the U.S. Pierre would dial a telephone number of a U.S. based Company ABC which provides the reverse call origination service for international callers. Pierre rings the Company ABC's telephone, for example, several times and then hangs up. Since the call was not completed, Pierre does not incur any charges for it. Based on the transmitted signaling information, the Company ABC determines Pierre's telephone number with the use of the ANI detecting means. The Company ABC, using a “live” or automated operator, then calls Pierre and asks for the called party number, i.e., Jimmy's telephone number. After obtaining the requested number, the Company ABC places the call to Jimmy. If Jimmy answers, then both parties, i.e., Jimmy and Pierre, are held on line, and the operator bridges the call between them. Using this call-back service, Pierre pays the call charges which are based on the U.S. rates even though he initiated the call from outside the U.S.
The described method has two significant drawbacks. First, the calling party outside the U.S. evades payments to the foreign-based telephone carrier for the call expenses because the initiating call was not completed to the providers of the reverse call origination (Company ABC). The call was purposefully intended not to be completed. The foreign telephone carrier does not collect any money for the uncompleted call even though the telephone carrier incurs expenses for transmitting signaling information associated with the call alerting. Cumulative effect of lost revenues by the foreign carriers may negatively affect foreign relations between the U.S. and other countries, and possibly violate international telecommunications treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory country.
Adversely affected by this service, the international carriers could either apply pressure on the Company ABC to discourage the reverse call origination or deploy means to outright prevent it. For example, high volume unanswered calls to the U.S. could be easily detected and consequently blocked by the international carrier on a called or calling number basis.
Setting aside the above issue for a moment, the second disadvantage of the above method includes the need for additional hardware and human resources. Thus, this method requires two outbound U.S. calls (one call leg is from the Company ABC to Jimmy, and the other call leg is from the Company ABC back to Pierre); the U.S. operator's involvement to set up the calls; and special ANI detecting equipment for determining the calling party's number. The required additional features contribute to the service complexity, and the attending higher cost for the reverse call origination service.
A more sophisticated method of the reverse call origination eliminates the need for the “live” operator and two phone calls, as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,027,387 to Moll. In the '387 patent, a system is described having a special REDIC (Reverse Direction Calling) equipment which serves calling and called stations. When a caller desires to cost effectively place a call to another country or to a different time zone within the U.S., the call is sent to the caller's PBX and then to the REDIC equipment which includes a computer and a database. The computer uses the database to determine whether the call would be cheaper if it were originated by the called party. If so, the calling party's REDIC sends a packetized message via the public network to the called party's REDIC requesting reverse call origination. After the handshaking, screening and confirmation of the request between the two REDICs, the call is originated by the called party rather than the calling party.
The '387 patent has certain advantages over the previously described ANI-based service, and is well suited for situations in which cheaper calling rates vary based on time of the day that the call is placed and the calling zone within the U.S. Thus, taking into account a three hour difference between Los Angeles and New York, in accordance with the Moll's invention, a 7:00 a.m. call (Eastern Standard Time) between LA and NY will be originated from LA to take advantage of the off-peak telephone rates. On the other hand, a 7:00 p.m. call (Eastern Standard Time) will be originated from NY to save on long distance calls. It is apparent that the cost effectiveness of the calling rates alternates due to the time zone difference. Therefore, the additional expense of installing REDIC equipment will not cause the attending significant loss of revenue for different vendors and service providers, because the number of calls originated from either NY or LA will not, on average, increase or decrease disproportionately.
The '387 patent, however, does not suggest any incentive for installing the additional REDIC equipment by a common carrier if the calling rates of that carrier are always higher than the other carrier, as is the case with the U.S. and foreign carriers. If the calls always originate from the U.S., the foreign carrier will most certainly refuse to support the reverse call origination and may even lobby its government to prohibit the service via diplomatic channels.
To overcome the above disadvantages of the prior art, the present invention provides for reverse call origination via a non-signaling network without imposing any unfair burden on the foreign carrier for the call setup, tear down, etc. or requiring any additional specialized telephone equipment.